so dead is dead then, so lets all use flintlock because dead is dead. its is also like saying that back in the 1800s when the self contained cartridge was developed and everybody went to it that no innovation occurred. there is a lot here that is new 3 new bullets to start that we didn't have. twist rates not before available to the everyday shooter/hunter. factory ammo offerings for longrange with the accuracy to match. innovation doesn't have to be from the ditch to the moon to be a solid step upNo, but my point is that actual innovation was a rocket from the 1850's to 1950's, and since then, all we've done is spend $Billions to squeeze single digit% performance out of the stuff that is older than any of us. I get caught up in this stuff just like anyone else, and then sometimes when I compare downrange m.v. and energy of the thousands of cartridges available to us, I acknowledge how much mental masturbation it all is. When almost every modern cartridge is pushing 1,500+ fps at 500y+, and 90%+ of animals are taken inside of 100y, where you could have killed them with a decent crossbow, it can all be much ado about nothing. There is no way to quantify or prove this, but I'd be willing to bet that frontal diameter is almost never the factor as to whether or not a game animal dies, (accepting huge swings, like, don't shoot an elephant with a .223). If you were able to put a fatal shot into the vitals of a deer with your 7rm, for example, and you were magically able to repeat the same shot under the same conditions with a 6.5cm, or a 243, or a 300wm, or just about anything in these middle of the road calibers, the result would be the same. You could shoot an animal with this 6.8 western, or a 6.5 prc, or a century plus old .270, and nothing will change at all. Now, I'm guilty of buying every new thing that comes out just like many of you, but I am honest about the lack of real difference. Now excuse me while I go back to building my 6mm arc ar, because I definitely needed a 3rd 6mm cartridge that performs worse than the .243 and .240 Weatherby I already own, but fits in an ar, and when compared to the 6.5 grendel ar I already own, it ummm, does something better, maybe.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
6.8 Western
- Thread starter BT_1224
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
D
Deleted member 115360
Guest
Well, I have a 1-8.5 twist 270 Weatherby barrel and an action at the Smith right now, waiting to be reamed for 170gr loads. I ordered that barrel in April last year, and that bullet already existed. I didn't have to fistfight anyone to get that fast twist barrel, and I am far from an innovator, so...... yeah, nothing about this is original. Now, I may own one 6 months from now, but I won't pretend they re-invented the wheel.
Nomosendero
Well-Known Member
A step up from what in this case?
Certainly not a step up from a .270WSM with a fast twist barrel and a med. length action. I would never notice the slight difference in overall length and 3-4 oz. wt. And I would still be able to buy factory ammo, this round may make it or it may not.
but the point being made is you customized your rifle for your needs and that is great I do it all the time but the average guy just wants factory offerings and not the cost of customization with the 6-8 month waits, they are happy to go to the local shop and get what they need without the hassels and the new offerings in the last few years offer them that, creedmore,prc,and now western. things are looking up for the new shooters
Nomosendero
Well-Known Member
The one thing that may be good here with this smaller powder capacity whisbang and the Fury is more cartridges of this diameter may
generate more long range bullets for the WSM, 270 & 270Wea., that would be a plus!
generate more long range bullets for the WSM, 270 & 270Wea., that would be a plus!
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2016
- Messages
- 694
Smaller capacity? The 6.8 western will still be close to 60 grains of powder while the fury is much less.
D
Deleted member 115360
Guest
I think modern commercial cartridge success is achieved when you start seeing it chambered in low end mass produced rifles like the ruger American and the Savage axis. If the cartridge is lauded as something new by guys like the aforementioned Ron Spomer, who's opinions are undoubtedly influenced by industry$$, then you can make the masses run out and buy something en masse. This isn't an attempt to push some new innovative cartridge, just a hope of a big payday if the stars align. That being said, I hope it is insanely successful, and floods the market with cash, so they can keep working towards something that is actually new, and maybe makes new gun owners explore hunting, or firearm ownership, or reloading, or any other aspect of this industry that we all love so much..
elkaholic
Well-Known Member
The SS is about 73 grains of h20 and the 6.8 looks like a near copy.
Nomosendero
Well-Known Member
Yep, smaller capacity than the WSM & 270 Wea.
Doublezranch
Well-Known Member
They called it the 6.5x300.
Here is a picture of a 1971 Sierra reloading manual.
Attachments
JasonZ_MIT
Member
Yes ... can't afford more gun safes, let alone more guns with almost indistinguishable cartridges and performance. Besides, the soon-to-be POTUS Pretender-in-Chief will ban ownership of "AR-style" weapons in his first minute in office, assuming he can remember when Inauguration Day is ...
New crossbows can shot 100 yds with a 1-2 second flight time and the more expensive models can deliver 1" or 2" groups. Don't need a suppressor. And not (yet) regulated by NFA. Something to think about.
May be the next phase of "long range hunting", at least for 2 years.
D
Deleted member 115360
Guest
Nice sir. I read an article about it several years ago, and I thought they had actually launched it under another name, but my memory can't be trusted too much these days. It was shocking to me to discover that ol Roy was all over this 6.5 stuff decades ago, but like almost everything he created, he was too far ahead of his time to be truly appreciated. The best ballistic engineers we have are still trying to compete with him. I remember when the 338 lapua became really popular, and I was in the Army and amazed by this new cartridge that could do things no cartridge before it could ever imagine..... until I did the research and realized that the 340 Weatherby that Roy built in the 50's was within 1% of the new magic cartridge.
Buckys
Well-Known Member
Completely agree.
I think it is a huge step forward that affordable factory rifles shooting heavy 270 bullets are on their way. I can't find anything different about it versus putting a fast twist barrel on a 270wsm but there are very few, if any, manufacturers who were going to build that.
If you like custom rifles, great, but the reality is that having factory rifles in calibers like 6.8 western is going to increase the diversity and quantity of heavy 270 bullets and I'm a huge fan of that.
If it catches on half as much as the 6.5cm, it also means there will be lots of brass (not necessarily the case for many of the wsm's) as well as dies, etc. for the 6.8 western.
I can't wait for the 270/6.8 RPM, Fury, Nosler, etc. either. There is plenty of room at my 277 table. And my 284 table. and my 264 table.
